Nairobi_Demon

We don’t need picks 7 & 8 unless we can trade them on for a player from another club. We have plenty of young talent coming through. Better fall back option is to trade Clarrie and keep Trac

I think our ability to play hard ball on Trac is inextricably linked to securing a trade for Clarrie - once Oliver’s deal is secured, we can more credibly claim we’ll hold Trac to his contract rather than accept GC’s low offer of picks only and no Humphrey. As long as Clarrie’s trade is pending our hand is weak as everyone must know that our worst case scenario for the club is for both to remain at the club next year, for multiple reasons including relationships, next gen midfield space, and skill diversification

My take is that they want to move on one of Trac or Clarrie, probably prefer to retain Trac, would trade both at the right (high) price, realize Clarrie has a lot less trade value, and believe we can maximise our trade position by having both in the market at the same time - for each we have a back up option and we would automatically rise our price for Trac if we secured a trade for Clarrie and vice versa giving the receiving club an incentive to deal first.

The club’s statement on the selection panel issued Aug 14 stated it was aiming to make an appointment “by mid-late September”. That’s pretty explicit and suggests they have a clear process and timeline for reviewing candidates, interviewing, and taking a decision. Given the off-field governance challenges that have beleaguered the club the past few years, I think it’s essential that they follow a clear process even if it confirms Buckley as the best candidate. Ramming through a decision without adequate due diligence and participation is almost always a recipe for setting up future leadership instability and governance problems.

I certainly didn’t intend to tar Yze with my comment. Simply to point that I don’t think there are rules preventing clubs conducting coach interviews during finals. As you say, it’s part of the business cycle. As it turns out, Yze’s appointment was announced right around the time of the 2023 GF. Exactly the same timeline we are on. One that makes a lot of sense if the Senior Coach is to influence the trade period and have adequate time to prepare for the pre-season.

Good post. I also think the overall fitness of our midfield remains an issue. You also raise a good point on having two midfield coaches. It seems very odd. Surely it leads to confusion and undermines accountability in having two coaches. Indeed, it suggests this was always an improvised solution that would not survive 2025.

I’m pretty certain Richmond were conducting their interviews during our finals campaign in 2023. Indeed, I think there were comments that Yze was distracted preparing for his interviews and that it negatively affected our planning.

It’ll be interesting to see how we pull up next week - Chaplin really looked to push the team to their physical limits this week and I’m not sure they’ll be able to back it up given our fitness levels still don’t seem back to what they were a few years ago. I really hope it doesn’t result in more late season injuries like Windsor’s hamstring.

I think this is a useful for article for us. It’s been clear for some time now that they’re a deeper governance and management problems at the club that are preventing us from attracting players, specialists and high quality line coaches to replace the likes of Yze and Burgess. And while we might not agree with the specific examples Cato has cited, she correctly puts attention on the broader issues rather than the simplistic “solution” of sacking the senior coach.

I would focus on why we have been unable to attract seasoned specialist line coaches in the last 2-3 years, e.g., to replace Yze, and why our fitness seems to have deteriorated since we replaced Burgess with Griffith.

Controversial opinion on demonland, but I don’t think Fritsch has been too bad. Except his uncharacteristic inaccuracy. (And that’s before factoring in that he’s a new dad and might not be getting a good night sleep - personally I can’t imagine having to front up to play football in the first two weeks of our first child’s birth. Second was less stressful. Once you both realise their little but quite resilient even at that tender age 😁)

I have three questions I’d be grateful for the panel to discuss: Why was Turner dropped? He came in after a 5 goal haul in the VFL, was decent against Geelong (I think our 5th or 6th highest rated player), and yet was dropped despite other players contributing far less. To what extend is our 4th quarter fade-out the result of conditioning vs attitude? Is there any evidence from demonland training reports that we’re doing heavy loads on the track? Can you discuss each of our line coaches and their credentials/expertise? And can you discuss the process and status of the CEO search? I’m increasingly worried that the lack of a permanent President, CEO, etc. combined with somewhat make shift coaching arrangements is a key reason why the players look so unhappy and dispirited, particularly the senior players.

Is anyone else having or had problems with the international club membership subscription to Watch AFL and have any advice on how to resolve? I received the voucher for the 2025 season from the club in late December but it didn’t work. I emailed them in January but have received no response. I’m now emailing the Watch AFL help desk and their telling me the code should begin with “AFL25” not “AFL2025” like the code I have and the club should have issued a new code. Any advice welcome. P.S. I’m not impressed that I’ve received no response from the club in over a month. I realize that the international membership is not the most prestigious and lucrative membership category but surely such members still deserve a response.

Exactly. The Club needs to credibly signal that they are prepared to hold him to his contract and not trade him if they want leverage with Petracca and an alternative club. One way to do this is for senior leaders to make bold public statements that could make them look foolish after a trade, like being certain that he will play in the red and blue in 2025 (Goodwin, Pert, Lyon, etc). It’s a credible signal because it’s costly - it’s a statement that comes with some reputation damage if it turns out wrong. Conversely, Petracca and his management seem to want to make the relationship seem so bad and irreparable such that the club decides it’s better to accept a weak trade rather than have him around the club. In this regard, other MFC players stating the relationship is bad is unhelpful for the club. Better other players don’t say anything or, alternatively, say something along the lines that “look he’s gone through a lot, but we’ll get around him if he stays”. That may be hard to say in the current context but the fact that it’s hard to say makes it credible and would bolster the club’s position. For what’s it’s worth, I think the players would get around him if he were to stay. Too many good memories, players would understand he’s been through a lot, and they may also have some sympathy with some of his criticisms and concerns about the club’s performance. I also really question whether this is the right moment in his recovery to make such a big decision. The challenge I see with Petracca’s strategy is what it signals to any interested club — on the one hand it credibly signals his ambition and drive, but also that this personal ambition is bigger than the team/club. I’m sure that would make other clubs pause. And thus if he pushes too hard on the “irreconcilable narrative” and continues to leak internal club issues to credibly signal this fallout (issues I’m sure all clubs have and don’t like aired), it will get to the point where other clubs will see risk not only opportunity in a trade. Conversely he could risk future captaincy and other status symbols should he push too far down this path but still end up at the Dees. Anyway, will be interesting to see where this lands. Personally, I hope he stays because of the high performance standards he brings.

I’m increasingly of the view that this season has gone pear shaped because of some fundamental mistakes in our season strategy. It’s starts with the game plan: 1. Gameplan - I suspect about one third or half way through the season we began to realise that we went too far in tweaking our game plan. I can’t remember when it started but from about round 9 or 10 onwards we started to see players regularly confused about whether they were playing for territory, pressing high, holding the ball, etc. This has to be on the Senior Coach as he would be the one setting the overarching strategy at this level but the over-reaction to last year’s performance and failure to execute relates to various second-order areas of coaching that are not directly Goodwin’s responsibility but flow from the overarching strategy (note I’m not calling for Goodwin to be sacked and personally I’m not really interested in that debate here - there are other threads for that). 2. High-performance program - We are simply not running over the ground like we should be at this time of year and have not been able to run out games for weeks. That’s partly because of our youth (see below) but even many of our senior players are struggling. I have two hypotheses here: either we misunderstand what fitness levels would be required to execute the new game plan and got the high-performance program wrong, or about mid-way through the season, when we realized we’d over corrected and we lost Trac, we realized we were unlikely to challenge this year and have adjusted our performance program to build for 2025 rather than taper off and peak in Aug-Sept 2024. 3. Skills - related to why it become clear we had over-reached on the new game plan, our skills development program has not delivered the desired and perhaps anticipated improvement in skills across the playing group and certainly not at the level required for the new game plan. 4. Midfield - our coaches still don’t seem to know who to move into the midfield. They therefore don’t know the strengths and weaknesses of our core midfield group and thus how to develop their midfield method. They clearly now seem to be experimenting with players in the middle (see last night’s game) and that can only be for next year (not this year). They have no cohesion - something Goodwin values. 5. Regeneration - I have two hypotheses here. Once we realized mid-season we were unlikely to challenge, we shifted to prioritising junior players rather than playing experienced players - a mini rebuild on the fly. This year we have consistently played Windsor, Howes, Tholstrup, Woewodin, Turner, AMW plus given a taste of AFL to Brown. This is too many for a side to carry, particularly when the game plan is changing. I also think this clear prioritisation of juniors players would have demotivated some of our more experienced but second tier players. Second, I think we’re also playing catch up on re-generation. We seemed to have a strategy in 2022 and arguably 2023 of always playing our best 22 rather than selecting our best 19 or 20 plus 2-3 of our best future prospects. In short, we prioritised challenging over re-generation and have sought to catch up this year, particularly from mid way through the season. 6. Motivation - the players don’t seem motivated and willing to put their bodies on the line (see last night’s missed tackles) because they know that the coaches know that we can’t challenge this year and they’re already looking to protect themselves for 2025. In short, and given the age of some of our star players like Gawn and May, I think we need to play the long game and focus on getting this team and our strategy right to re-bound and challenge in 2025 and build for 2026+.